May 30, 2006	Tuesday	Jumadi-ul-Awwal 2, 1427

ISLAMABAD, May 29: The government is likely to miss the second deadline of June 30 set for drafting a law to protect geographical indications (GIs) — ownership rights of certain products — owing to poor response from the ministries concerned to the issue.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Intellectual Property Rights Organisation said the draft was being examined and it would be finalised in few months.

Sources told Dawn on Monday that the government made commitment with the European Union for the GIs legislation to cover up the issue of basmati among other products well before the first deadline of June 30, 2005 that expired without any development and now the second deadline was set for June 30, 2006.

With respect to basmati rice, Pakistan had agreed with the EU to file GI protection for the commodity in the EU GI registers and also consider sharing it as a common GI with India. This happened in June 2004.

The sources said that the Rice Exporters Association of Pakistan had provided the draft of the proposed GIs act or ordinance as early as the year 2000. “This draft has since been vetted by the relevant authorities many times. But unfortunately, no action had been taken in this regard, the sources added.

When contacted Intellectual Property Rights Organisation of Pakistan Director General Yasin Tahir said the draft was being examined and would be finalised in the next few months.

He said a seminar on the proposed draft would be held in July to seek suggestions from the stakeholders. He said that the law would provide protection not only to rice but also to other products like apricot, Peshawari chappal, Multani halva, Hala ki ajrak, Sargodha’s kinnoo, Kasuri methi, Sindhri mango, etc.

He disclosed that the application filed for collective marks of basmati had been accepted by the organisation. “The legal process will take time in finalising the issue.”

The sources said what was missing was a unified platform, such as a Pakistan basmati association where all the stakeholders sit in one place with equal weight and respect and make decisions in national interest.

Therefore, all the existing bodies, including REAP, keep on saying various things while keeping their own narrow interests in view. While doing this the national interest gets confused and results in inaction, the sources add.

It seemed that all the diverse bodies like REAP and the recently established Basmati Growers Association had a professed common interest in protecting Pakistan’s rights over basmati rice, but their methods were different, the sources said, adding that in their pursuit of a common goal, they could not represent other stakeholders — millers, sellers and wholesalers — as one body represents exporters and the other only growers.